Instrument Flying
 

I'm about to start some instrument flying training. Could anyone recommend particular books or DVDs which helped them?

I fly on an NPPL (so can't get an IMC rating) and have 180 hours flying experience.

Hi!

The one that comes to mind is "How to commit suicide in then easy lessons."
Sorry, but instrument flying is not the kind of thing to teach yourself from books and DVDs.

Live long and prosper!
max

Maybe I should have made myself clearer. By 'training' I meant with an instructor. The books / DVDs are as an aid, not in order to teach myself!

This
Into IMC - An Overview - DVD - IMC Rating Studies - Pilot Warehouse'ASCO

and this will probably help. Ill be buying something similar when I start my IMC

The IMC Confuser - IMC Rating Studies - Pilot Warehouse'ASCO

Instrument Flying stuff
 

Hi Miroku,

The standard texts on the subject are the Trevor Thom books, the Jeppesen Sanderson one covers it in great depth albeit from an American perspective. My favorite is the Instrument Flight Training Manual written by Peter Dogan and developed by Professional Instrument Courses Inc. The latter book is relatively concise and includes 'war stories' to illustrate each section. I found this book useful when doing the FAA IR in 1997.

You mention that you fly on an NPPL, so I assume you are doing the instrument training out of general interest, rather than a desire to hammer off in to hard IMC and fly airways. This is an excellent idea, as good instruction of any kind is worth having. Most people recon that instrument training improves the accuracy of their VFR flying.

As you are probably aware, there are two aspects to instrument flying. The first is controlling the aircraft by sole reference to the instruments. This includes identifying instrument failures and flying on 'partial panel'.

The second or applied part of the training involves the navigational aspect of instrument flying. This includes navigation by VOR, NDB, GPS and ILS etc. It also includes things you need to know to conform to the IFR system, like holds, SIDs, STARSs, Lost Comms Procedures etc. Many of the books and electronic media devote a lot of time and material to the applied part of instrument flying, which may be of less interest to you.

Good luck with your flying. I've a selection of books and VHS videos on instrument flying, which although a bit dated (i.e. 1997 - so not much on GPS), may be of use. If you'd like to borrow them drop me a PM.

Safe Flying,
Richard W.

I think the current American IR books are the best for serious IFR stuff.

Trevor Thom book 5 is what you are supposed to read for the IMC Rating but I found that book (back in 2001) to be very poorly written and probably the work of several people, stitched together. It was also barely relevant to modern IFR which is done wholly with GPS, backed up by VOR/DME when available.

In "UK Class G informal IFR" one is not going to be flying holds or anything else too fancy. One cannot have legit IFR rights on an NPPL (i.e. all types of approaches into Class D) but from a pure safety POV what is highly desirable is flying an ILS, which is hardly difficult. A sim, and some ground instruction, is the way to get this started.

Radio nav is 100% usable for normal VFR flight too; I have been doing that on every trip since the day after I got my PPL.

Many thanks for all the replies so far.

I am not about to commence serious IFR flying but would like to be able to fly on instruments in cloud if the weather deteriorates and also navigate using NDBs and VORs more effectively than I am currently able. I repeat, I fly on an NPPL licence, I'm not a budding airline pilot - maybe 40 year's ago!

I would also like to be able to fly an approach on instruments in extremis. I realise that this would possible be illegal but I would prefer to argue this on the ground afterwards, rather than to explain at the pearly gates that I could have saved myself but the rules didn't allow it.
This may be a Bad Idea. I'm sure someone will put me right!

I found Richard L Collins's books invaluable when I was learning (almost 20 years ago now). I imagine the underlying principles are still as true as ever, even if the details have changed a bit. But they are focused on what you might call "serious IFR".

Here's one for example. Can't argue with "One of the primary tasks in instrument flying is to get priorities straight in your mind ..." can you?!

Pardon?

Flying on instruments in cloud is very very , like deadly, serious.

Learn it right and do it right, stay current and proficient in identifying and handling instrument failures or stay VFR at all times (if that means not flying on iffy VFR days so be it).

If that seems a hard line try exiting a cloud with the wing coming off, because thats how "inadvertent" VMC into IMC very predictably ends - often very quickly after entering the cloud. Sadly plenty of accident reports to illustrate that reality.

Worth a look
 

Instrument Flying Handbook

...and it's free

There are very good IFR interactive courses at AOPA Air Safety Foundation Interactive Safety Courses

An excellent book, a must for every instrument pilot is "The Instrument Flight Training Manual" from Peter Dogan (ISBN 0-916413-02-0)


http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/image...500_AA240_.jpg


Get also "Rod Machado's Instrument Pilot's Survival Manual"
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:W...ducts/1066.jpg


And, the "Air Force Instrument Flying Manual" reprinted and published by Airguide Publications

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...500_AA240_.jpg


Check also, and become a member of PPL/IR Europe for exchanging knowledge and experience about instrument flying. Resources, forums & more: PPL/IR Europe

By the way, you are absolutely correct, and show good airmanship, in your search of books and other learning material. Instrument flying is something to continually think about, review and learn. Keep also in mind that there are very few good or competent "instrument" flight instructors. Good luck. Happy & Safe Flying,

I think what he meant was he wasnt going to start flying IFR because he cannot on his licence. It was more of a safety measure which in my mind is a great idea. Any extra training is good. Surely someone who has had at least some training stands a better chance of avoiding the "wing coming off" whilst exiting cloud after inadvertent entry into IMC.

"What Next" Max wrote:
I strongly disagree :) E.g., here is another good book on in depth understanding GPS approaches: Vasa Babic's RNAV Training Manual (PPL/IR Europe - RNAV Training Manual Order Form)

http://www.pplir.org/images/stories/...anualLarge.jpg
http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...anualLarge.jpg

Can I suggest if you want to learn about radio nav you look at the AOPA RNAV course?

Hello!

Over the years, I have encountered two self-taught IFR pilots who perished whilst perfoming their act. One sadly took his girlfriend and two small children with him, the other had "only" one passenger aboard. But I cannot derive any statistics from that, because I do not know how many self-taught IFR pilots survived the experience...

And to Miroku: I understand your motivation now and that you want to get tuition by an instructor. Which is a good thing in a way. I know nothing about the UK NPPL, but as a JAA IFR instructor, I am not allowed to train anybody in instrument flying outside an official course. If I did anyway, it would be without insurance cover and with the risk of losing my licence in the process. So before beginning the training, I would strongly recommend to check the legality of the whole plan.

Happy landings,
max

SoCal

When I learnt to fly in a C152 the little aircraft was IFR equipt. My instructor on asking about the VOR, ADF etc always said that as a training VFR pilot I did not need to know about such things and refused to show me how the things worked.

I am of the opinion that if you have it find out how to use it. In an ideal world pilots will never get in a mess will never go near cloud but in the real world situations do occur.

The better your knowledge the more options you have. That does not mean you ever as a VFR pilot even have to have the things switched on but ???

So yes miroku get your training as you will anyway ;) also use MSFS its an excellent tool for home practice and currency on instrument flying.
Iinstrument flying will give you a better understanding and may even make you more cautious about taking to the clouds.

In that way instrument flying will add to your flying but dont use it for real without the right aircraft and the right complete structured training and rating.

Pace

Which is complete and utter b@llox, and why JAR does nothing to enhance safety.....

Just to confirm my understanding, you cannot get (legally) instrument rated with a NPPL, correct ?

Hi!

Not that I wish to defend JAR, but it was exactly the same in our previous national licensing system. No instructing allowed outside training organisations. With the exception of a few things like multiengine type ratings.

But under the JAR syllabus, five hours of basic intrument flying are now included in the PPL course, which is more than nothing. Without regular practise however, these skills will be lost again within a few months.

Oh dear... the olde argument that one should not teach somebody to fly on instruments, because they might use those [vital life-saving] skills, and come to harm...

Why do they teach the 180 in IMC in the basic PPL? Surely that's a bad idea because no flight in IMC should be taught. Proper airmanship dictates that the pilot should die.

In the USA you can do that. Of course, the USA is covered with aircraft wreckage, so clearly that's a bad thing. So, why does JAA require this? Job protection - that's all. Like everything that happens in Europe.

Is that also the case with the NPPL re 5 hours instrument training? in my opinion any instrument training is better than none.

I do not know what instructors can or cannot do regarding training so can only imagine the no instrument training can only refer to "official" loggable training rather than unnofficial stuff?

I go with 10540 re Job Protection the industry is riddled with it in Europe and all under the guise of so called safety.

Pace

Which is one very good reason to go onto the N reg ;)

Why can't someone rock up to a FI and say "Look, I have an AI, a TC and a VOR CDI thing, can you teach me to use them please?....oh and while you are at it could you please teach me to fly an autopilot coupled ILS please"....(that last bit might be a problem in Europe as I doubt many training organisations have a funtioning AP :) )....

Even if skills DO fade, being experienced to Instruments in IMC with a FI is a good thing. At least then IF it happens then the pilot is prepared and probably won't lose the plot.

Basic attitude instrument flying is not really that difficult. In fact I'd go as far as to say that keeping an aeroplane wings level with funtioning instruments is easy.....surely everyone should be able to be taught this if they wish, whether they fly with a NPPL or whatever...

Which is also quite incorrect and as a JAR IR Instructor I am a little shocked that you know so little of the rules.

A JAR Instructor without Instrument restrictions can teach Instrument flying to a pilot without being part of any official course. It is only of the training is towards the issue of a rating where certain criteria have to be met. The holder of an NPPL may approach any unrestricted Instructor who is able to teach instrument flying and be taught the entire content of the IMCr or even IR without being attached to any training organisation. There is of course no way to attach the rating to an NPPL but it would certainly enhance the pilots skills and improve their awareness of IFR flying and planning.

They can.

Good, I thought so :ok:

If I was teaching someone to fly I would teach them to fly VFR/IFR as if there was no distinction, with seamless transitions.

The whole VFR-only thing makes no practical sense (the weather doesn't exactly co-operate on the product differentiation :) ) and merely results in pilots who are barred from getting any utility from their plane.

The legality of flight in IMC is something else... obviously one cannot do it where it's going to get one into trouble.

Anyway, this chap can upgrade his NPPL to a PPL and then he's sorted for adding the "right" paperwork to that :ok:

As regards JAA training, the PPL has to be done via a registered school (in the UK, anyway). The IMCR I don't know about, but the IMCR is substantially outdated if one wants practical IFR capability; I spent ages banging NDB holds and what was the point? I certainly would not train towards any "official" product without logging it legitimately because, one day, that training may be admissible towards something (but only if properly logged).

I did my civil IR (I had already held an RAF Master Green IR for many, many years) at Kidlington in 1974 with Dai Heather-Hayes.

He had a wonderful poster on the wall behind his desk. It showed two pilots sitting in a cockpit taken from behind with the instrument panel in front of them.

The caption was;

"Instrument flying is an unnatural act - probably punishable by God".

I thought that was a wonderful statement. Does anyone know where I could get a copy of this poster?

Whiskey Kilo Wanderer wrote:

How very true. But often people are far too keen to rush in to the applied part before their basic IF is satisfactory. I learned IF on Chipmunks and later Jet Provosts; however, the emphasis was on instrument flying rather than (in the Jet Provost) using the Eureka DME system for navigation in IMC. Although we did do a few 'radio navigation' trips, relying on Eureka and UHF/DF!

In the latest edition of one of the more popular flying magazines, there's a caption stating incredulously 'they taught 'blind flying' on those instruments!' Yes, after about 10 hours IF in the back of a Chipmunk, I had to fly 2 SRAs on my IRT - one was a full panel ACR7 approach into RAF Andover and the other was a limited panel (no Artificial Horizon, my Examiner toppled that!) SRA into somewhere else (can't recall). Yet elsewhere in the same magazine there were pictures of some poor little light tourer with more screens than a Dixons' showroom, rather giving the impression that IMC rating flying is all about radio / GPS navigation. It isn't!

The emphasis at IMC level should be on proficient IF and the 'applied' phase only comes after a pilot can fly accurately by sole reference to instruments. When I taught IF, the students were often quite surprised at how inaccurate their basic IF was; this has become worse now that there is no minimum IF time in the JAR-FCL PPL syllabus. Some basic radio navigation (VOR, NDB and VOR/DME fixing) is taught, but for the NPPL at least there is an hour of IF awareness included in the course.

If your business is flying SE/ME spamcans in IMC, then those gucci glass systems are probably what you want and good luck to you. However, I found that many 'traditional' FIs couldn't even teach the use of the Garmin GPS 150 or GNC 250, so a student may discover that finding someone who can provide adequate training using those new Garmin wonder-boxes might prove difficult.

Last point re. the NPPL. NPPL pilots may not fly in IMC - it's a Day VFR only licence and pilots are not subjected to any medical assessment regarding their ability to fly without visual reference. With a NPPL, you must keep well clear of cloud at all times!

Hello!

Not that I sleep with a copy of JAR-FCL under my pillow, but I think I know my rules quite well. This is, what I am allowed to do according to JAR-FCL 1.390:

In short words, this article says: "The privileges of the holder of an IRI(A) rating are limited to conduct flight instruction for the issue of an IR(A)."

I understand it in the way, that for every other purpose (like the training we talk about here that cannot conclude with the issue of an IR(A) because of the underlying NPPL license) I am not allowed to give instrument flying instruction.

And Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.205 states very clearly in several places that "This module (referring to practical instrument flying training) shall be conducted at an approved FTO".

So I, with my very limited knowledge of the rules, from these two articles conclude that I am only allowed to teach instrument flying within an FTO.

But maybe you can (and will) explain to me, how these rules may be interpreted differently!

Looking forward to that!, max

Whats Next

The piece above refers to the IR which is carried out in a much more controlled invironment and lays out your licence limitations in regards to training a pilot towards an IR.

For instance with the above that you have pasted you cannot teach the IMCR only the IR ? Correct me if I am wrong as I am not an instructor.

But the main point is that exert is relevant to a structured training towards the final goal of an IR and not unofficial training which is leading to nothing other than a better understanding of nav and instrument flying.
At the end of the day the NPPL is still an NPPL with the legal restraints of an NPPL and not an NPPL plus (an instrument qualification)

You could call it an instrument appreciation flight or whatever? its not loggable by the NPPL. He holds an NPPL and as such doesnt need you along to make the flight legal. As long as you dont enter IMC and do all your training under VFR and in VMC if the aircraft itself doesnt comply for IFR flight, what you do in the aircraft is up to you?

Thats how I see it but I maybe way off the mark?

Pace

Max, I am not going to get into a fight with you, it us my February resolution.

You really need to get a proper understanding of the rules before you start a pissing contest though.

I will say again, there is nothing preventing a suitably qualified FI teaching Instrument flight outside of an approved course.

You will try and convince me next that I can't teach tailwheel or complex outside of an approved course......

To add Pace has it quite right apart from the fact that the student can log the time as PUT regardless of whether the training was towards the grant of a licence or not. If towards the grant of a licence then it must meet the criteria for issue if the license or rating.

But hey what would an Examiner know about the rules....

Based on that interpretation, how could you conduct refresher training for an instrument rated pilot who already has a rating? And if you couldn't, who could conduct such training?

A lot of this has to do with the mindset towards regulations.....

It was explained to me by a German Airbus test pilot thus:

A Brit, a German and a Frenchman all receive a new aircraft type. Each decides they want to use it for a specific purpose.

The Brit checks the manual - if there's nothing stating that he can't do it, then he'll go ahead and do it.

The German checks the manual - if there's nothing saying that he can do it, then he won't do it.

The Frenchman merely says "What manual?".........

So unless there's a specific rating privilege stating "The holder may give IF instruction to any other pilot" or similar, a German simply won't do it.

This isn't some racist nonsense, it's a consequence of different types of legal systems. One needs rules for everything, the other only has rules for prohibition.

Beagle

I thought the French just took the manual and with a pen scribbled out the bits they didnt like and wrote in their own ;)
We British are Queue mad and will form one anywhere just for the sake of it :ugh:

There is a whole industry of specialists throughout Europe Germany included whos job it is to find loop holes and grey areas in the law so that their clients can make money while working within the law. Aviation is no different :E

Pace

I'm assuming the OP is unable to obtain the JAR PPL, perhaps for medical reasons?
With 180 hours logged and in current flying practice an upgrade to the full PPL should be very straightforward, then just complete the IMC course so you can legally use the privileges it affords.

That assumption would be correct about 2/3 of the time, but a lot of people went for the NPPL in the belief it would be cheaper :)

My God, what have I started! I only asked for suggestions for books/DVDs which could help me whilst I did some instrument training with an instructor. By the way, he is a former RAF instructor, current 747 pilot and also teaches PPL, IMC, aerobatic and formation flying.

Having now learnt a good deal more about the subject and read the more apposite comments it would seem that my basic idea to gain experience of instrument flying was a good one.

However, it is all very well to say that I should never put myself in the position of flying in cloud. Many more experienced pilots than myself have been caught out unawares. Having read the letters in AOPA magazine, a lot of pilots expressed the view that their ability to fly on instruments saved their lives and this is where I am coming from.

Regarding the update of an NPPL to a PPL this is not possible in my case due to medical reasons. I believe it it this reason, rather than cost, that most people opt for the NPPL.

Miroku

Dont worry about it we fight about anything in these forums more about one upmanship :ugh:

Regardless your approach seems very well thought out so all the best with your flying. MSFS is a useful tool to keep your instrument scan and understanding up to scratch.

Have fun

Pace

Depending on what the medical condition is (I don't want to pry), then you should investigate the FAA route if you want more than a NPPL, which is very pragmatic when it comes to medical certification. As the FAA PPC is a full ICAO certificate there is noting from stopping you from flying IFR if that is your desire. You can also fly G reg aeroplanes without formality.

You can find a list of approved medications / conditions on the web, and you'd be surprised what illness you may have but can still get a class 2 medical certificate.

Interestingly Viagra is an approved medication, the only stipulation is that it is not taken within 6 hours of flying..... :}

Englishal

The reason for that is you may have a problem getting into the aircraft if you take Viagra before ;) well some of us might! not that I have ever needed to take it :E

Pace